CSA. (Source: Twitter)

The South African Olympic body has said that at no stage does or did SASCOC act under the direction or control of the minister of sport in the country [Nathi Mthethwa], or the government of the republic of South Africa.

In a letter to the ICC dated Saturday, which Cricbuzz has seen, the acting president of the South African Sports Confederation and Olympic Committee (SASCOC), Aleck Skhosana, writes, “At no stage does or did SASCOC act under the direction or control of the minister of sport in the country [Nathi Mthethwa], or the government of the republic of South Africa. Accordingly, SASCOC rejects any allegation or insinuation that the SASCOC intervention constitutes government interference.”

The concerns with regard to the administration of the sport in the country relate, inter-alia, to the following issues of concern, namely…the directive by the minister of sport and recreation for SASCOC to intervene into the affairs of CSA.”

The ICC constitution says a member is obliged to “manage its affairs autonomously and ensure that there is no government (or other public or quasi-public body) interference in its governance, regulation and/or administration of cricket in its cricket playing country (including in operational matters, in the selection and management of teams, and in the appointment of coaches or support personnel)”.

“The CSA board and those senior executives who serve ex-officio on the board (the company secretary, the acting CEO, the CFO and the COO) are directed to step aside from the administration of CSA on full pay.”

CSA responded on Friday in a release that said it “does not agree with the resolution taken by SASCOC and has not had the opportunity to engage with SASCOC on various issues raised in the communication”, and that “CSA is taking legal advice regarding the basis on which SASCOC has sought to intervene in the business affairs of CSA”.

In his letter to the ICC, Skhosana wrote, “CSA’s steadfast refusal to make the forensic report available is puzzling, as it appears that they are unable to self-correct if the report is not made available, not only to its own members, but also to the media and the public at large since it is a public document.”

On the charge of interference, Skhosana wrote, “…we are quite prepared to meet with [the ICC], and discuss this issue with you and to give you the assurance that the SASCOC intervention is a bona fide attempt to assist one of its members who clearly and desperately needs such assistance”.

But Skhosana was correct at something: “The public, players and ex-players, stakeholders, and sponsors have lost complete trust and confidence in the administration of cricket in South Africa.”

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here